RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      17세기 중엽 해남 윤씨가의 노비소송 = The Lawsuits filed by the Haenam region`s Yun House, over Nobi servants, in the mid-17th century

      한글로보기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      In terms of lawsuits of the Joseon dynasty period, the most valued were the principle of requiring parties directly involved in the lawsuit to present relevant material on their own (當事者主義), and the practice of placing importance upon pleads...

      In terms of lawsuits of the Joseon dynasty period, the most valued were the principle of requiring parties directly involved in the lawsuit to present relevant material on their own (當事者主義), and the practice of placing importance upon pleads or arguments made at court(辯論主義). They became distinct characteristics of the Joseon society lawsuits. In other words, the parties involved in the lawsuit were demanded to collect and present all the necessary material pertinent to the case on their own. Under such principles, the people who either initiated or involved in the lawsuit had to be equipped with the capability to see the trial through, and ideally they would have to be a relatively equitable match. Yet in reality, either the parties involved were without such capability, or one side was weaker than the other. The practice of placing ultimate importance upon pleads or arguments made at the court was in danger of being abused, or underused for that matter. In the history of the Western countries of the late 19th century, the right entitled to an overseer to ensure justice is served(釋明權) was conceptualized in order to ensure more fair and appropriate trials. Granting an overseer to exercise this right contributed very much to the civilian lawsuits that operated upon [the somewhat dangerous] ``Involved parties only-principle,`` and enabled equality to be preserved in substantial terms. It should be noted that an instance, in which the local administrative official presiding at the lawsuit(訟官) exercised this right of his to reach a fair judgement, can be found from the lawsuits filed by the Haenam region`s Yun House over Nobi servants, in the mid-17th century. Of course, the decision of the Gangjin Hyeon`gam prefect, the official in question, to exercise such right did not lead directly to a judgment and the issuing of a sentence, as in contemporary trials. His role was limited, and only his opinion and certain questions regarding the case(``報辭``) were relayed to a higher office with the case itself. Yet as apresider at the case, he raised ``reasonable doubts,`` and was faithful to his duty of ``raising questions,`` in order to ensure a fair and appropriate trial. Also as an exerciser of the right to literally find the truth, he maintained an impartial and neutral attitude, and never leaned to a particular side. This example of the Gangjin prefect`s exercise of this authority shows us that the Joseon society was enjoying a high level of legal culture.

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼